Gwreck
-
Posts
13,503 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
12
Content Type
Profiles
New York Mets News, Rumors & Analysis
New York Mets Videos
2026 New York Mets Top Prospect Rankings
New York Mets Trade & Free Agent Rumors
New York Mets Fan Guides & Resources
2026 New York Mets Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by Gwreck
-
I was always partial to the Quad Cities River Bandits (original logo). They've since redesigned to one that's similar to what's above.
-
I'm not clear what the relevance is of a facebook comment of an incoherent idiot.
-
Manfred clarifies his comments in an interview with Ken Rosenthal: "Let me go back and put the comment I made in context. I was asked about long term, radical thoughts and what I said was that I was I prepared to have a conversation about shifts. Look, we have a lot of conversations in this building about a lot of things, so I don�t think it would be a good idea to read too much into that comment." Full interview http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/rob-manfred-mlb-baseball-commissioner-talks-pace-players-and-plans-012815 (Spoiler: he also gives a predictably inane answer suggesting he'll do nothing about the Mets' ownership).
-
Got a return address for him? I've got a few thoughts for him already about how stupid changes that he's in favor of (like pitch clocks or banning defensive shifts) will ruin baseball.
-
Edgy MD wrote: Already decried as a marketing blunder I'm not linking to that article because I think it's silly. I am fully capable of focusing on the positive here. The Mets are fixing an error with their scoreboard: that's good. It doesn't detract from other shortcomings in the team, but I can still be happy when they do something good. The lack of a playoff-caliber roster is a totally separate issue.
-
Ceetar wrote: The narrative is really fucking tired at this point. I'm sorry you think it's tired, but it remains accurate. There are only three ways for it to go away: 1. The Mets have a payroll commensurate with playing in the largest baseball market in the world; 2. The Wilpons sell the team; or 3. The Mets start winning playoff games. Ceetar wrote: I don't think it comes off as tonedeaf What was the last time you thought the Wilpons or MLB did something that reflected poorly on the Mets? Honest question.
-
Edgy MD wrote: The thing I advocate for is for a fan base having more sense than the to get agitated about another silly fake scandal because Mets. I wouldn't call it a scandal, and I bet you're right that there's not much to this committee that he's the chairperson of. It still reflects poorly on MLB and the Mets. For that alone, fans have plenty of reason to be upset. The team is in desperate need of goodwill (or new ownership). The best possible thing for the Wilpons to do - save selling the team - is to remain as invisible as possible.
-
Frayed Knot wrote: I suspect that every owner and/or managing general partner is on some committee or another. I bet you're right. That doesn't change the fact making Fred Wilpon chairperson of this particular committee is a colossally stupid decision to make, if for no other reason that it gives the perception that MLB is run by idiots.
-
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: I like the Shields/Scherzer idea, frankly. At this point, I'd probably rather slightly overpay in money for one of them than overpay in money/prospects for one of the flawed shortstop options out there. There's a lot of logic here. I worry a lot less about Flores' defense if Scherzer is striking out 12 batters a game. In all seriousness, there's a LOT of logic to signing Scherzer. Get the best available player (especially in a year when our first round pick has been lost) and worry about having too many starters later.
-
Frayed Knot wrote: - There's been five 1st-ballot electees in the past two classes. I haven't researched that but I'll bet that's unusual at best and maybe a first overall. It is the first time there has been 5 in two years combined. But having a large number of worthy candidates becoming eligible in a short period of time is not unusual: 1989 ballot debuts: Bench and Yastrzemski (both elected) plus Jenkins and Perry 1990 ballot debuts: Palmer and Morgan (both elected) 1991 ballot debuts: Carew (elected) and Fingers; Jenkins and Perry both get in this year 1992 ballot debuts: Seaver (elected), plus Fingers gets in
-
Edgy MD wrote: Mets looking to keep their longtime (20-year?) record of avoiding arbitration hearings intact They went to an arbitration hearing (and lost) with Oliver Perez prior to the 2008 season.
-
Quick fix: 1. No more anonymous ballots. You want to vote for Darin Erstad, you have to do it publicly. There will still be people who do that but it'll be reduced if they have to own up to it. 2. No more 10-player limit. You have to vote "yes" or "no" to each player on the ballot.
-
Ceetar wrote: Valadius wrote: Jim Thome - 612 HRs. Should be first-ballot guy. Sosa had 609 and got what, 6% of the vote? Jim Thome career WAR 72.9 (9th all time for first basemen) Sosa career WAR 58.4 (outside the top 20 for right fielders) They're not anywhere close to the same player, before any other nonsense comes in about steroids.
-
Lots of strange things going on: 1. Clemens gets four more votes than Bonds. 2. Someone voted for Darin Erstad. 3. 4 people voted for Troy Percival.
-
28 votes short this year. 69.9 percent.
-
Verducci found room on his ballot for both Jeff Kent and Fred McGriff.
-
Ceetar wrote: so check 15 boxes. so write 15 names at the bottom. etc etc. If you check more than 10 boxes, your ballot is invalid, no matter what else you write on the ballot. The instructions are to vote for up to 10. This is not complicated. There is no room for write-in votes, and write-in votes are not counted, whether you submit an otherwise valid or an otherwise invalid ballot.
-
It doesn't matter. If you check 10 boxes and also write "Pete Rose" on the bottom of the ballot, you voted for the 10 players whose boxes were checked. Same thing if you check 10 boxes and also write "Easter Bunny" on the bottom of the ballot.
-
Write-ins are not actually tabulated.
-
I was surprised to see so few votes for Edgar Martinez. I thought Jay Jaffe's piece for SI was a very good read on Martinez's worthiness of induction: http://www.si.com/mlb/2014/12/23/jaws-2015-hall-of-fame-ballot-edgar-martinez
-
If considering candidates is too hard work for Marty, maybe he should resign his vote. Embracing laziness is awful. He should be ashamed to have written that.
-
Edgy MD wrote: So you're saying they're not contenders as is? There's no doubt he's a very good player. I'm questioning whether his contract is a very good asset. I think they're contenders if everything goes right in 2015. I think it would be wise to improve the team more. I recognize that the Tulowitzki contract is problematic but I think it's worth acquiring given the potential of winning now.
-
Edgy MD wrote: I generally think they are World Series contenders as is We can assume (fairly, I think, from the Giants) that anyone in the playoffs is a World Series contender. The Mets will need 88-90 wins to make the playoffs (that's been the cutoff for the wild-card game over the past 3 years). They had 79 in 2014. They are going to need big bounceback years from Wright and Granderson, plus improvement from D'Arnaud, plus Harvey producing, plus no backslide from DeGrom or Duda to get those extra 9-11 wins. Tulowitzki, even in his injury shortened years of 2012 and 2013 was worth more than 5 WAR per year.
-
Edgy MD wrote: I guess the equivalent would be Travis d'Arnaud, Ruben Tejada, Matt den Dekker, and Rafael Montero for Troy Tulowitzki, but a version of Troy Tulowitzki without injury questions, Coors Field questions, and not locked into a prohibitive contract. I don't know that there's a possible match out there. I generally think they are World Series contenders as is, but which cleanup hitter playing a premium defensive position do you suppose that they might back the truck up to get? Tulowitzki. Carter was 31 when the Mets acquired him and yes, he had been very healthy previously but he was a catcher in his 30s and gave the Mets about 2.5 good seasons before his own age/injury issues. Tulowitzki is a couple of years younger and his prior injuries notwithstanding, I bet he would give more value to the Mets in his 30s than Carter did. The money shouldn't be an issue with the Mets playing in the New York market. Winning also brings in more money. I say make the deal.
-
Jimmy Rollins traded to Dodgers.
